Skip to main content

LOST? Well, not yet...

Can you believe that our president and the Congress might just be willing to give up the United States' sovereignty to the United Nations? Courtesy of the UN and their "Law of the Sea Treaty" (LOST), our government just might be ready to sign over our sovereignty. Scary, isn't it?

... "This treaty is an affront to American national sovereignty. It would give the United Nations authority over much of the world's oceans, including the power to regulate and tax deep-sea mining, and redistribute the proceeds to Third World governments. Moreover, its "hortatory language" provisions are a loaded weapon that activist trial lawyers could easily wield to force the U.S. to adopt laws that the American people's elected representatives otherwise would not." ...

[Source: Competitive Enterprise Institute]

By supporting something as heinous as this treaty, President Bush continues to alienate the true Conservative base. As with illegal immigration, the president is simply on the wrong side of the issue. I really don't understand how any Republican could even CONSIDER this treaty! Of course, since President Bush is not up for re-election next year it's no skin off his back; however, it certainly will be for any Republican that goes along with the President's push to get this treaty through Congress.

Smart Americans have been fighting against LOST since Ronald Reagan's first term in office. Take a few minutes to educate yourself on The Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST) using the videos below. To read more in depth information, visit the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

(For the record, Senator McConnell has come out against this treaty recently. It's so nice to have him back on the Right side of issues again!)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is conscription the prescription?

US Representative, Charlie Rangel (D-NY) is at it again. Rangel's prescription for fixing the ills we're feeling in Iraq is a draft . I have very mixed feelings about this. Conscription is conscription no matter what you choose to label it. Is that appropriate in a free country? On the flip side of this coin, I've often thought that compulsory national service would be a great idea for American kids right out of high school. It might have been a better start for me than learning to down beer at a Liberal Arts university! Two years in the service might give kids time to think about their future, learn higher levels of responsibility, and begin to take life more seriously. There are many countries who require some level of mandatory military service: Belarus, Chile, China, Croatia, Serbia, Russia, Iran, Lebanon, our neighbor Mexico, and our old buddy Germany, to name a few. Gee, now that I look at that partial list... aren't many of those countries Socialist or at battl...
19 comments
Read more

As the Blog Turns...

Gee. I have found myself fascinated by the soap opera unfolding in the comments section of this blog since last night. One little mention on a controversial Democrat's blog and it's High Noon on ConservaChick! (Yes, I'm laughing while I type this.) For those of you who have no idea what's happening in the ever-expanding comments section , join the club! Here's what I know about Mark Nickolas from bits and pieces I've read on his blog, and from a local news report: Nickolas likes to sneer at Republicans and call them snide little nicknames as he provides his "Unfiltered and Candid Look at Politics, Politicians and the Media in Kentucky;" he raised a ruckus within the Democrat party here in Kentucky by filing a suit against the chairman of the party , Jerry Lundergan; and he will be appearing on the same panel with yours truly on Thursday night. That's about it. You now have the benefit of my not-so-extensive knowledge on this subject. Nickolas poste...
22 comments
Read more

Pol Watchers Responds

I think it's important for anyone with a voice on the internet to present all sides of an issue. In that spirit, I am posting the response I received via email from John Stamper of the Lexington Herald-Leader to the piece I wrote about censorship on blogs: "Your post about Pol Watchers does not contain the entire thread of comments, as your blog states. If you go to the post in question , you will see that there has been no effort to eliminate comments just because they question Jonathan Miller and Mark Nickolas. Plenty of them still remain. However, as stated in my comment on Pol Watchers, we're not going to allow people to use the blog as a forum for name calling. It's that simple. Check around, it's a pretty common policy. For example, blogs at WashingtonPost.com have this policy: 'User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsi...
15 comments
Read more